Template talk:Classnav

Title

Shouldn't this nav box have a title at the top? When I first came upon it I had an idea what it was but it was rather confusing. Shouldn't it say something like "Various Class information" or something at the top of the table? Brelkin 00:48, 7 April 2006 (EDT)

New Classnav

Eh, I kinda prefered the old "wall of text". Plus, if you compare the old one to this new one, this one is actually wider by a couple pixels. =P Should warn us about these changes. May have to get used to this one you know. Pzychotix 17:47, 18 August 2006 (EDT)

Last line

I reworded from "How to kill a :" to "In PvP, playing a :" since it makes more sense. I had assumed if I clicked the Pa there it would tell me how to kill a paladin. Schmidt 21:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.. how about "Fighting other classes as a:"?APΘLLΘ^(ZEUS) 08:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, "How to kill a:" is most certainly backwards logically, but "In PvP, playing a:" would sound much better as "PvPing as a:" in my opinion. User:Recluse/Sig 14:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Twinking

There's quite a few Twinking a <class> guides on the wiki already. Would anyone mind if I dug up some more guides, and added those plus a new entry to this table? Cipri 04:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Class nav box disappearing

If someone could check it, I am unable to see the clasnav template anywhere (including this page) when I am not logged in. I can't see any reason in the coding for this (A difference, however, is that when I am logged in I am viewing the original wiki layout) --Noola 14:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Dk vs DK

User:Dark T Zeratul said "Probably should be "DK" instead of "Dk," because it's an abbreviation of two words and not one"

While I can somewhat see your reasoning, its not a hard rule. Most people are smart enough to know that Dk isn't a single word.

From the original name stand point, death knight is not a proper noun, its not supposed to be capitalized. If we were looking at the RPG abbreviations for examples, we would see that many class names with two or more words are still listed in lower case when it comes to abreviations. The abbreviation for death knight for example for use in RPG tables is "Dkn". The D is capitalized and the kn from knight are not.

So what we are bordering on here is not an arguement on which is more accurate, but rather one of aesthetics.

I won't revert it back to Dk, however I'm just pointing out that either way could be considered valid. This is a decision that can be decided on by wowwiki members as a whole, as to what style they prefer. -Baggins (talk) 02:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Notifications (Usage)

Just to notify I am replacing all the class articles with Template:Classfooter except article Class. I believe the right space above article of high importance should be reserved for infobox likewise to Race or topics of the subfields class (e.g. Storyline, history...etc). It shouldn't include controversial stuff of PvE guides fan fiction. top series, while resources is more useful for displaying examples.

Detailed Articles like Quest is okay to include infobox series (e.g. Quest A, B, C...etc) since some of them quest event though minor, they do play a chain reaction role leading to larger events. In addition, I don't think WoW would be detailed-article needing to expand into Meta-article (then infobox meta-topics/series) and thus the regular navbox as programming functions...etc, unless Blizzard have announce plans for implementations of different development systems and modding community network. --Ramu50 (talk) 03:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Uhm... I don't get what you're trying to imply here. PvE guides are fan fiction? There's something wrong with the World of Warcraft article? Something else about API?

Could you explain your argument again before making any drastic edits, please? --k_d³ 17:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm just going to have to disagree with you Ramu50. Why don't you start up a vote and see what the community thinks.  Howbizr^(t·c) 5:17 PM, 24 Jul 2009 (EDT)

Its not a vote, I only made this notifications so 3RR won't be involved. All Wikia wikis by definition are created to be official contents not fan-created content, they can be inclusive, but high priority significance shouldn't be granted, nor should they be permitted. No Wikia hosted wikis belong to a single person only, Wikia have all rights. --Ramu50 (talk) 05:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Because if people disagree with you, things will probably not be pretty. The wiki operates on terms of community consensus, not "What I say goes".

Additionally, I'm still looking for answers to my questions earlier. --k_d³ 22:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Updating

I have neither the expertise nor the energy to update all the pages in the Druid section. However, when people look for information on a class in WoW they're also frequently looking for help on a specific "role" that they're looking to fill with that class, i.e. tank/healer/damagedealer. I'd love to get a Tank Guide row, a Healer Guide row and a DPS Guide row at the bottom, with links and X's as appropriate for classes that can't fulfill role Y or Z. However, that would bloat the matrix and isn't a good solution unless someone wants to deal with A LOT of reorganization. Parl2001 (talk) 17:22, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Mop Updates

Due to the way the talent system is redesigned, does anybody else think that the Talent Builds in this template is no longer useful?

Also does anybody have other ideas that should be applied to this template because of changes in MoP?--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:27, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Uh it seems that the ability pages and the talent pages were fused so it also seems kinda redundant to have both here... （￣ _ゝ￣）

Any opinions?--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:05, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Template seems to be fine as is. The individual pages just need updating, cause not all talents are abilities. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 20:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh so remove those that aren't abilities from the abilities page. It's just that the talent templates are in the ability pages.

What about the Talent Builds pages? They changed so fundamently that nothing in these pages are valid or will be able to put a proper build there due to the nature of the new talents choices.--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

One more question: What should be done with the old talents? should they be put in a different page or stay in there and occupy more than half the page with outdated content? I can convert the pages into new content based on the Monk Talent page, but i need to know what to do with the old info.--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Demon hunter

This template currently doesn't work for demon hunters and I can't see how to fix it. It's decided much by {{Classnav/link}}, so if someone could fix that it'd be appreciated. --g0urra[T҂C] 01:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Fixed it now so that it works properly on all demon hunter pages. --g0urra[T҂C] 12:23, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposal

heya! so, with the inevitable change to the FandomDesktop skin, we're gonna be losing a considerable amount of horizontal real estate for some users--primarily users who aren't logged in, since they can't hide the right rail. this classnav template can really eat away at the remaining space, especially on class pages where we have the infobox and the classnav right next to each other.

plus, since it's not technically classified as a navbox, classnav appears on the mobile skin where it looks... not great.

anyway. i was looking into possibly revamping this template and wondered... do we really need to link to every page type for every class, every time? who's gonna routinely need to go from "Druid abilities" to "Starting a death knight"? so i have a proposal: i'd like to retire classnav and add a line to classfooter that allows for similar cross-class linkage--but only for pages of the same type as the page the footer is on. for instance, the "Druid abilities" page's footer could look like this:

{{User:Eithris/test2|Druid|Abilities}}

User:Eithris/test2|Druid|Abilities

i also moved the "X category" link into the single-class line and added the word "pages" to that line's label for clarity, but the main change is the addition of the "Y by class" line. --Eithris (talk) 13:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

No objections from me. I've personally never found classnav to be particularly helpful. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 15:17, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Same as DT. Looks good to me. — SurafbrovWarcraft Wiki administrator T / C 15:19, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Fine by me. PeterWind (talk) 15:37, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

I have no particularly strong opinions on the matter. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 16:27, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Support. "[Druid] pages" should be "About [Druid]s". The bottom third (other class ability pages) could arguably be eliminated for even further brevity. DDC (talk) 18:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

hmm. although i’m suddenly realizing i added that line based on my own habits, i do think keeping some cross-class links (besides the ones to the main class pages) would be useful for at least some readers. alts are pretty big these days. Eithris (talk) 23:00, 12 July 2021 (UTC)